Search

Group-living animals must coordinate their behaviour to maintain group cohesion. Therefore, documenting when and how wild animals coordinate their behaviour in groups is important for inferring the cost of collective behaviour. However, previous field studies focused on certain species exhibiting strong social relationships, and limited information is available on species that form fluid groups, which may show different behavioural coordination. Here, using biologging, we examined the stability and mechanism of group cohesion in Adélie penguins, Pygoscelis adeliae , travelling on sea ice. GPS tracking showed that two or three birds in each of three groups departed the colony at the same time, travelled together for several hours and reached the ice edge simultaneously. In all groups, penguins achieved a consensus on travelling speed, maintaining group cohesion until reaching the ice edge. We collected records of three-axis acceleration for a group of three birds, which allowed us to classify their behaviours (resting, walking or tobogganing) and examine behavioural coordination among the group members in detail. Two possible mechanisms of synchronous travelling were speculated. First, the group members match their timing of resting, suggesting that the onset of resting of an individual is followed by that of the others. Second, locomotion modes (walking/tobogganing) and locomotion speed in each mode while travelling in groups differ between individuals. To maintain group cohesion, penguins may adjust either the speed in each locomotion mode or the proportional use of the locomotion mode to match the overall travelling speed. Additionally, the tracked penguins alternated their relative spatial positions and the order of synchronous resting initiation, suggesting mutual social influences. Overall, Adélie penguins actively maintain group cohesion with occasional members by mutually coordinating their behaviours while travelling in groups on sea ice. • The process of behavioural coordination affects the cost of collective behaviour. • We used biologgers to study the collective behaviour of travelling Adélie penguins. • Penguins maintained their group cohesion by regulating their speed with each other. • Movement speed was adjusted by coordinating rest timings and locomotion mode. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Seabirds care for their offspring in remote breeding colonies where foraging sites are distant and may be unpredictable, and where chicks are left unaccompanied for extended periods during their parents’ foraging trips, leaving them vulnerable to predation or starvation. One way to mitigate this risk is for individuals to coordinate parenting duties with their partner. Many biparental and cooperatively breeding species are now known to coordinate their care, though the mechanisms underlying this are not well understood. In Manx shearwaters (Puffinus puffinus), both parents alternate shifts of incubation in a coordinated manner. To resolve which processes may underlie this routine, we imposed a wing-loading handicap on parents to reduce their foraging efficiency, forcing them to choose between an extended foraging trip or to return to the nest before their condition has recovered to optimal levels. We found that handicapped parents took significantly longer trips than normal, to which their partner responded by lengthening their incubation shift, suggesting shift durations are not pre-determined. However, the duration of foraging trips and the mass at which foraging birds returned to the nest appeared to be mediated by the condition of the partner. These results suggest that while foraging trip duration is largely driven by the need for the foraging bird to recoup its own condition losses, information-transfer between the parents may facilitate a more cooperative mechanism whereby the decisions made by foraging birds still account for the condition of their partner.

We argue that perceivers associate collective directional movement – groups moving from one place to the next – with higher levels of social cohesion. Study 1 shows that pairs are rated as being more cohesive when described as engaging in directional movement compared to non‐directional activities. Study 2 replicates this finding using film clips. Study 3 reveals that the proximity of directionally moving dyads is a better predictor of perceived cohesion than behavioural synchrony. Study 4 replicates the original finding and reveals that perceptions of common fate and shared goals both contribute to the effect, with the former having more predictive power than the latter. We suggest that collective directional movement is an invariant part of social environments and is utilized by perceivers to make inferences about social dynamics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In ensemble performances, group members use particular bodily behaviours as a sort of language to supplement the lack of verbal communication. This research study focuses on music regulators, which are defined as signs to other group members for coordinating performance. The following two music regulators are considered: body gestures for articulating attacks (a set of movements externally directed that are used to signal entrances in performance) and eye contacts. These regulators are recurring observable behaviors that play an important role in nonverbal communication among ensemble members. To understand how these regulators are used by chamber musicians, video recordings of members of two string quartet ensemble performances (Quartet Ensemble A performing Bartók and Quartet Ensemble B performing Haydn) were analysed under two conditions: a low stress performance (LSP), undertaken in a rehearsal setting, and a high stress performance (HSP) during a live concert. The results provide evidence for more emphasis in gestures for articulating attacks (i.e. the perceived strength of a performed attack-type body gestures) during HSP than LSP. . Conversely, no significant differences were found for the frequency of eye contact between HSP and LSP. Moreover, there was variability in eye contacts during HSP and LSP, showing that these behaviours are less standardised and may change according to idiosyncratic performing conditions. Educational implications are discussed for improving interpersonal communication skills during ensemble performance.

The social intelligence hypothesis, which posits that the challenges of life in complex social environments drive cognitive evolution, enjoys widespread theoretical and empirical support. Recent years have seen the emergence of a novel variant of this hypothesis, suggesting that cooperative breeding is associated with the elaboration of socio-cognitive abilities. With this cooperative breeding hypothesis ( CBH) rapidly gaining currency, the time is ripe for a critical appraisal. Proponents of the CBH argue that cooperative breeding leads to increased cognitive performance, calling upon cognitive and motivational processes including spontaneous prosocial tendencies, attending to and learning from conspecifics, teaching and coordinating activities. We review the literature on the natural history and cognitive abilities of cooperative breeders and other social animals and conclude that there is no compelling evidence that these processes are either unique to cooperative breeders or particularly cognitively demanding. Thus, there is currently no reason to suppose that cooperative breeding has major cognitive consequences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The process of domestication has arguably provided dogs ( Canis familiaris) with decreased emotional reactivity (reduced fear and aggression) and increased socio-cognitive skills adaptive for living with humans. It has been suggested that dogs are uniquely equipped with abilities that have been identified as crucial in cooperative problem-solving, namely social tolerance and the ability to attend to other individuals' behaviour. Accordingly, dogs might be hypothesised to perform well in tasks in which they have to work together with a human partner. Recently, researchers have found that dogs successfully solved a simple cooperative task with another dog. Due to the simplicity of the task, this study was, however, unable to provide clear evidence as to whether the dogs' successful performance was based on the cognitive ability of behavioural coordination, namely the capacity to link task requirements to the necessity of adjusting one's actions to the partner's behaviour. Here, we tested dogs with the most commonly used cooperative task, appropriate to test behavioural coordination. In addition, we paired dogs with both a conspecific and a human partner. Although dogs had difficulties in inhibiting the necessary action when required to wait for their partner, they successfully attended to the two cues that predicted a successful outcome, namely their partner's behaviour and the incremental movement of rewards towards themselves. This behavioural coordination was shown with both a conspecific and a human partner, in line with the recent findings suggesting that dogs exhibit highly developed socio-cognitive skills in interactions with both humans and other dogs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]